Final Project

Jake de Luca

Professor Siewers

ENLS 341

3 May 2024

Final Project

Introduction     

Upon departing the hermitage, Alyosha gave Father Paissy a twisted smile and a look of strange content in silence. Alyosha waved, almost to offer some sort of half-hearted goodbye, and strode toward the gates of the hermitage – weary of his future, but confident in his thoughts. Dostoevsky’s work is relevant as a contrasting opinion toward modernization when considering the moral agency he instills in his readers, offering an alternative to dualistic individualism developed from Russian philosophy and providing a sense of life that is more holistic and connected with life, earth, God, and the cosmos. Fyodor Dostoevsky uses storytelling to invite the reader to understand the text from a moral standpoint. With that, he signals a deeper philosophical and theological purpose behind his narratives. Rather than totally depend on the rigid texts of pre-modern Christianity, Dostoevsky incorporates his own experiences as a man surrounded by the influence of modernization in Russia to shed light on the importance of morally-conscious behavior. Alexander Dugin and S.L. Frank take an approach honed in on being and searching for meaning through the human experience. Their works ground the reader by combining literal symbolism of the pillars of Christian ecopoetics with the transformative power of spiritual reality and truth.   

Focus Section One

Dimitri entered Zosima’s host room well dressed, carefully, and with sincere regret for arriving late. After scanning the room of pacified guests and asking for forgiveness for his tardiness, Dimitri sat down and leaned forward in his chair as if to restart the ongoing debate regarding morality. Book Two: Chapter 6 of Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov connects with Dugin’s writings on “The Catastrophe of Platonism” because both concern human beings’ individual responsibility to behave in a morally upstanding manner. Amidst awkward near-ending debate, Dimitri’s younger brother, Ivan, introduces the idea that it is not in any law or rule book for man to love his fellow men. Furthermore, he insists that mankind’s inclination to behave in a loving manner toward one another is purely out of the goodness of each person’s heart. Interestingly, Ivan doesn’t deny the existence of morally conscious individuals here. Instead, he says that human beings are enabled by their own self choosing. This debate comes relatively early on in the novel and features the family together in the presence of Zosima, a holy man they trust vicariously through Alyosha. What’s more, this debate brings into question the existence of the afterlife. To better understand this debate, it’s important to recognize that Christian philosophy emphasizes the afterlife as an eternal reward for a well-lived life. So, human beings feel a sense of obligation to earn their way into the afterlife by living in a manner that is pleasing to God and obeys natural order. Ivan’s convictions aren’t born of neglect, rather, they expose a flaw within mankind’s belief in immortality. For if human beings denied their own immortality, they might feel a sense of freedom that could lead to immoral behavior. Ivan goes on to say, “There is no virtue if there is no mortality,” which defends his claim that humans will act to fulfill their desires if it weren’t for mortality. (Dostoevsky 74) He adds, “…then nothing would be immoral any longer, everything would be permitted, even anthropophagy.” (Dostoevsky 73) 

An excellent example of such behavior is brought up by Dugin in “The Catastrophe of Platonism” when he recalls the Biblical story about Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. In this Biblical story, God creates the earth – among other things – as well as the first man and woman, Adam and Eve. The two are surrounded by an abundance of life at the beginning of time in an earthly paradise. However, “…the devil, evil, and the harbinger of the end…” appears in the form of a serpent to influence Adam and Eve to reject God’s warning and eat an apple from the forbidden tree. (Dugin 105) Thus, original sin is established, and with it, the first infraction of human morality. Dugin suggests that the beginning (time) and the end (banishment from The Garden of Eden) are close in that moment and the temptations of the serpent allow the divine, God, to deliver the two to the first end. This story is a prime example of human morality and willingness to forgo the laws of nature out of selfish desire. Here, humans are exposed to the first end, much as death is the end of existential life. The point then is to understand why humans act immorally, if not out of selfishness, then out of a lack of fear for the end. Therefore, one man’s desire to love another man is natural – like temptation – and considers the ultimate consequence of life – death. Without the knowledge of consequences, human beings would remorselessly act out of self interest. Dostoevsky and Dugin point out that virtue and immorality are directly connected, thus we as humans are called to live by virtue and believe in something beyond the material life we know.                       

Focus Section Two

Alyosha arrived at his father’s estate to be greeted by Marfa Ignatievna who told him that Fyodor was awake and having coffee alone in the other room. In a bitter, disinterested state of being, Fyodor met Alyosha with confusion as to his being there and goes on to offer a disjointed report on the status of his own health. Book Four: Chapter 2 of The Brothers Karamazov relates to S.L. Frank’s chapter “What Is to Be Done?” because both reveal the desire to save others and moral blindness. Fyodor faces anguish as he spoke with Alyosha – from his weak health, his family, and a longing for love and control. His attention to his bruised face and internal investigations causes him to be cold toward Alyosha and grow more narcissistic. Author of “The Moral World of Dostoevsky,” George Strem uses his journal to advocate for the acceptance of suffering as a way of receiving moral purification. Moreover, he says that “Suffering, besides its cleansing effect, also becomes for Dostoevsky a source of energy, a reason to love life.” (Strem 18) Specifically, Strem is talking about suffering in the context of the author, Dostoevsky, and how his acceptance of suffering as a part of life led him to produce The Brothers Karamazov, which is informed by Christian philosophy. In this scene with Fyodor and Alyosha, Fyodor struggles with acceptance of his circumstances being the head of a family that has turned greedy and misguided. Perhaps his struggle comes from a sense of guilt, but this chapter suggests that his intentions are clouded by a sense of individual concern instead. The chapter under consideration lays out a frantic back and forth dialogue between Fyodor and Alyosha which gives the characters contrasting qualities. The former, a grumpy, scornful old man against the latter, an inquisitive, prudent young man. The interaction between father and son presents a dynamic where Alyosha is trying to assist his father at the same time Fyodor is trying to project his idealistic will on those around him. Regardless of their behaviors in this chapter, there is a mutual trust between the characters where they are able to give and receive criticism – Fyodor being less accepting. 

Frank states that an individual’s desire to save is fed by a lack of understanding of the past leading to “…immeasurably exaggerated, in their blind pride, their own intellectual and moral powers.” (Frank 18) He believes that this desire causes moral blindness and inattention to others, seen by Fyodor and Alyosha’s shared desire to advise one another. However, Fyodor is the one who exhibits moral blindness as he laments about Ivan’s request for money and his own lust for Grushenka by being inhospitable toward Alyosha. Therefore, his intentions do not afford the opportunity to uplift himself and his son during their meeting. Yet, as Fyodor shares his turmoil, he unknowingly confides in his dearest Alyosha in a period of weakness. This strengthens the bond between the two men that is not limited by the relational identity of father and son. For context, Frank tends to ask questions of the reader to realign their focus and philosophize about existential life as it relates to others. As a realist, Frank tries to ground himself by only controlling the factors that pertain to the individual – I. By considering I, an individual allows themself to simply be, or exist as an entity driven toward a larger goal. So, instead of asking “What Is to Be Done?” a Frankian question Fyodor should ask himself is, “What can I as head of this family do to secure my own happiness and allow my children to learn from that experience?” In this way, inattention to others is thwarted by turning the attention to the self. Not in a self-centered way, but in a way that is constructive and conscious of the principle paternal duty to be a role model for his family.

Focus Section Three

The body of Father Zosima, Alyosha’s spiritual father and elder, laid out as the faithful gathered around his body in anticipation of something great. Gradually, Zosima’s decaying body let off an unexpected, rotten odor which caused the patrons to question the great Father’s holiness. Here, Book 7: Chapter 1 of The Brothers Karamazov works with Robert Jackson’s Close Encounters: Essays on Russian Literature. Specifically, the chapter on Mikhail Bakhtin’s Poetics of Dostoevsky and “Dostoevsky’s Christian Declaration of Faith” working in tandem to support the notion that faith is ongoing, therefore it must be a permanent, unwavering process of life. During the burial process of Father Zosima, Alyosha is found by Father Paissy sobbing – away from the crowd. In an effort to relieve him, Father Paissy recognizes Alyosha’s swollen face and says, “Your tender tears are a relief for your soul and will serve to gladden your dear heart.” (Dostoevsky 349) Father Paissy’s message urges Alyosha to rejoice for Zosima for reaching his eternal reward, but Alyosha is torn. He is overcome with emotion because of the significance of his relationship with Zosima, especially considering his parting advice to leave the monastery and join the outside world. In this chapter, author Fyodor Dostoevsky takes a unique approach by conveying the heaviness and stir of the crowd via long paragraphs of explanation. Rather than rely on dialogue and action, Dostoevsky interjects in this chapter to provide an authorial voice that summarizes the happenings of the burial day. He even goes as far to say that Alyosha is the hero of his story, signaling to readers the importance of Alyosha’s personal journey and his response to what is going on around him. Alyosha’s reaction to the patrons onslaught of comments in favor of pronouncing Zosima an immoral, corrupt, and sinful man is to take Zosima’s advice and leave the hermitage. However, Alyosha is unsure of his direction now, albeit he is confident that the monastery is home to enemies of Zosima, therefore enemies of Alyosha for having faith in the Father. 

    Considering having his faith shaken by the rudeness of others, Jackson offers Bakhtin’s view of Dostoevsky’s own life as an example of moral and religious fortitude for Alyosha. The focal point of Dostoevsky’s view of man and history is the idea of persistent development of the self. That is, the assumption of life as an opportunity to mature in faith and moral consciousness. Understanding that the self is merely a vessel by which God leads an individual toward knowing right and wrong and manifests Himself in us through our body and mind. This goes against the view of dualistic individualism and is replaced by an inspired sense of self that is more connected with creation. Furthermore, Jackson says that “His [Dostoevsky’s] life is a permanent process of ‘achieving, struggling, and through all defeats, refocusing on the ideal [Christ] and struggling for it.’” (Jackson 301) Alyosha is certainly struggling, so much so that he leaves to find peace. However, this is the moment where Alyosha should strive for more, drawing his mind into his body and allowing himself to grow closer to God. Dostoevsky explains this ongoing process as a law of nature by which human beings are exposed to truths that oppose existential life as we know it. This can only be understood when the individual realizes that their striving toward earthly goals is contrary to their nature. That humans are only fulfilled when they can evolve through defeat and remain focused on God – the ideal being. That way, divine energies can flow into the self and reach beyond earthly life toward the cosmos and God Himself. 

Conclusion

Nearly half a century removed from the rubble of Byzantine civilization, Fyodor Dostoevsky emerged as a unique writer following the early stages of European-influenced modernization. His writings in The Brothers Karamazov offered a significant perspective on the importance of introspection and morality. Dostoevsky’s work reinforces Christian ecopoetic tradition by posing his scenes in a reverent context which aims to connect the natural and the divine. Coupled with Dostoevsky are Alexander Dugin and S.L. Frank, who both focus on the interconnectedness of life as a source of consciousness and harmony for existential life, thus pointing toward transcendent meaning for human existence.  

Dostoevsky uses Alyosha as a hero who is closely following the words of those around him. Specifically, Dimitri, Fyodor, and Zosima. Alyosha is a character by which Dostoevsky’s mysticism is delivered to the reader in another form; having alternative, sometimes clashing, ideas regarding life. With that, Fyodor embodies a modern man who is enveloped by material life and serves as an example for Alyosha to learn from. Throughout The Brothers Karamazov, Dostoevsky posits consistent themes centered around morality and human nature. By doing so, his work subtly subverts readers’ expectations who valued modernization at the time at the cost of leaving Christian philosophy behind. Jackson notes that Dostoevsky goes further, emphasizing that “The teaching of the materialists is universal stagnation and the mechanism of substance, that is, death.” (Jackson 301) By that sentiment, Dostoevsky’s work comes full-circle with virtue being supported by morality, and morality being supported by the expectation of the end – death. Then, Dostoevsky’s book is everlasting because it does not consider moral virtue as beginning and ending with one individual, but ongoing. Today, readers are instilled with a sense of moral agency because of the book’s adaptability to modern western tradition. Therefore, The Brothers Karamazov serves as a method by which human beings can understand their own intellectual power, responsibility to others, and inevitable mortality to live an authentic, holistic, and fulfilled life. 

Bibliography

Dostoevsky, Fyodor. The Brothers Karamazov (Bicentennial Edition): A Novel in Four Parts with Epilogue. Picador, 2021.

Dugin, Alexander. Martin Heidegger: The Philosophy of Another Beginning. Radix, 2014. 

Frank, S. L. The Meaning of Life. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010. 

George G. Strem. “The Moral World of Dostoevsky.” The Russian Review, vol. 16, no. 3, 1957, pp. 15–26. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/125940.
Jackson, Robert Louis. “Bakhtin’s Poetics of Dostoevsky and ‘Dostoevsky’s Christian Declaration of Faith.’” Close Encounters: Essays on Russian Literature, Academic Studies Press, 2013, pp. 277–304. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1zxshr0.21.